3.6.4. Weapons that strike both armored and unarmored target areas are considered to have hit the unarmored target area.3.8. A hit that strikes both the body AND either an arm or a leg is assumed to have hit the body.

These two rules don't reconcile with one another if the target has an armored torso and an unarmored arm or leg. The intent here appears to be to have the target take the more harmful option - Losing a limb is generally more harmful than losing torso armor.

Possible change, could say that 3.6.4 takes precedence:

Quote:

3.8. A hit that strikes both the body AND either an arm or a leg is assumed to have hit the body. Rule 3.6.4 takes precedence over this rule.

Or if we want to avoid jumping around the BoW:

Quote:

3.8. A hit that strikes both the body AND either an arm or a leg is assumed to have hit the body, unless the body is armored and the arm or leg is not armored.